The Awareness Center closed. We operated from April 30, 1999 - April 30, 2014. This site is being provided for educational & historical purposes.
We were the international Jewish Coalition Against Sexual Abuse/Assault (JCASA); and were dedicated to ending sexual violence in Jewish communities globally. We did our best to operate as the make a wish foundation for Jewish survivors of sex crimes. In the past we offered a clearinghouse of information, resources, support and advocacy.

Thursday, October 28, 2004

US Department of Justice: The News Media's Coverage of Crime and VictimizationLast updated: December 28, 2004

Guidelines for Victims Who Choose to Deal With the Media
A brochure published by the National Center for Victims of Crime in 1987
entitled Victims' Rights and the Media offers valuable guidelines to
crime victims whose cases are covered by print and broadcast news media.
While the "rights" enumerated in this brochure are not mandated by
statute or policy, they should be considered guiding principles provided
by all service providers to crime victims prior to dealing with the
news media.
YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO:

Say "no" to an interview.

Select the spokesperson or advocate of your choice.

Select the time and location for media interviews.

Request a specific reporter.

Refuse an interview with a specific reporter even though you have granted interviews to other reporters.

Say "no" to an interview even though you have previously granted interviews.

Release a written statement through a spokesperson in lieu of an interview.

Exclude children from interviews.

Refrain from answering any questions with which you are uncomfortable or that you feel are inappropriate.

Know in advance the direction the story about your victimization is going to take.

Avoid a press conference atmosphere and speak to only one reporter at a time.

Demand a correction when inaccurate information is reported.

Ask that offensive photographs or visuals be omitted from broadcast or publication.

Conduct a television interview using a silhouette or a newspaper interview without having your photograph taken.

Completely give your side of the story related to your victimization.

Refrain from answering reporters' questions during trial.

File a formal complaint against a journalist.

Grieve in privacy.

Suggest training about media and victims for print and electronic media in your community (Seymour and Lowrance 1988, 7-10).

Guidelines for Television Talk Shows and Crime Victim Guests
In the past two decades, television talk shows have emerged as a
powerful genre to address various issues of importance to the public,
including crime. While such programs can have a powerful impact on
promoting victims' rights and needs, they can also be traumatic to
victim guests whose cases are sensationalized, or who are treated in an
insensitive manner.
Recognizing the need for accountability from television talk shows, the
National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC 1994) developed guidelines
for talk shows and crime victim guests that promote victim sensitivity
and reduce opportunities for "re-victimizing victims."
Television talk shows should use only those victims who have had the
benefit of counseling and guidance from a trained victim counselor,
professional, or advocate.

Crime victims should not appear in the immediate wake of their
victimization, particularly if they have not had the advantage of
counseling by professional victim advocates and service providers.

Child victims should not be guests.

A professionally trained victim advocate or crisis counselor should be on hand at all times.

Crime victims should be treated with dignity and respect at all times.

Crime victims should always be fully informed about the format of the
show; how their story will be told; who else will appear (in person or
otherwise such as from a remote location); and what subjects will be
discussed with each guest. Whenever possible, victims should be provided
with copies of the producer's notes on each guest.

If an offender (any offender) is to be physically present in the studio
or elsewhere in the facility, the victim should be given notice of the
specific facts and asked what arrangements can be made in the studio to
make the victim feel comfortable and safe if he or she chooses to be a
guest. Every precaution should be taken to prevent the offender and the
victim from "crossing paths" before, during, and after the show.

Victims should be offered the opportunity to get comfortable with the
set by allowing them to arrive early, or even the day before the actual
taping.

Victims should always have the right to view pictures, video/audio
tapes, and graphic or other depictions that will air as part of the
show.

Victims should be informed in advance of the option to protect their
anonymity by whatever means are necessary such as silhouette screens,
disguises, electronic voice alteration, pixel and fog screening, etc.

When the victim desires, no information should be presented that would
disclose the location of their home, place of work, or whereabouts.

Victims should have the right to request that their show not air in certain markets if there are safety concerns.

Victims should have the opportunity to request that disclosures which
compromise their anonymity or safety be edited from the broadcast
program.

Victims should be informed of when the original show will air and when the show will be re-broadcast.

Victims in the viewing audience may experience a crisis reaction while
watching a show about crime victimization experiences. It is strongly
advised that producers provide a disclaimer at the beginning of the show
cautioning viewers of the content.

Code of Ethics for Victim Advocates in Dealing With the News Media
In 1988, the National Center for Victims of Crime published a suggested
code of ethics for victim advocates in the media. With adherence to
these recommended guidelines (which were updated in 1995), victim
advocates can ease the trauma of the news media's coverage of crime and
victims and, at the same time, assist the news media in their attempts
to focus public attention on crime in our nation:

Friday, October 22, 2004

Convicted on charges of sexually assaulting a teenage girl and several adult women while on duty as a police officer. Rosen allegedly used his position as a police officer to sexually assault the victims between 1999 and 2001, including the 16-year-old who said she was raped in the back of Rosen's patrol car before he booked her on an unspecified warrant.

Rosen was convicted of 11 separate counts of sexual battery, false imprisonment and assault by a peace officer involving four women. Jurors found him not guilty on four charges relating to two of his six alleged victims.

Rosen has been charged with one count of rape, four counts of sexual battery and eight counts of assault by

a public officer, all felonies. There are also misdemeanor charges of one count of sexual battery and three counts of false imprisonment.

Rosen, who is married and lives in Lincoln, is accused of attacking the victims while responding to police calls. Police officials say the attacks occurred between fall 2000 and December 2001. The victims told investigators that Rosen was in uniform and alone when he contacted them while checking suspicious activity or responding to calls, said Capt. Mike McCarthy, head of investigations.

Rosen never threatened the women if they told of the alleged sexual contact, but ''the uniform was enough of a threat,'' Venegas said.

McCarthy said the investigation began Dec. 14, when department officials were told by someone connected to the 16-year-old that she had been raped by the officer while in his custody.

McCarthy said the department immediatelybegan investigating Rosen, because he patrolled that area on the graveyard shift.

The investigation into the teenager's claims was just starting when a patrol officer reported hearing of a different alleged victim.

Suspected in two possible cases, Rosen was suspended Dec. 28, two weeks after the initial report, and placed on paid administrative leave.

He was still on paid leave as of Monday, Venegas said.

Investigators found four more women who had been assaulted after Rosen was placed on leave, McCarthy said, adding that officers were unable to find everyone they searched for.

Venegas said both the criminal and departmental investigations into Rosen are continuing. The department is recommending his termination. He is being held on bail and could face life in prison if convicted.

Rosen is charged with 17 felony and misdemeanor counts stemming from the reported assaults. He will appear in court today for a bail hearing.

According to court records, Rosen allegedly used his position as a police officer to sexually assault the victims between 1999 and 2001, including the 16-year-old who said she was raped in the back of Rosen's patrol car before he booked her on an unspecified warrant.

All the allege attacks occurred while Rosen was on the graveyard shift. Rosen, who is married and lives in Lincoln, has declined commet.

He was arrested Monday after an investigation by Internal Affairs and the Sacramento County district attorney. He has been on paid administrative leave since Dec. 28.

Abuses by cops and priests should cause us to rethink teaching children to place blind faith in authorities

By RV Scheide

News Review - May 16, 2002

From a very early age, most of us aretaught to respect men in uniform. The uniform bestows a special status upon the person wearing it. We teach our children that this is someone who can be trusted in an emergency or a time of need.

However, the arrest of Sacramento Police Officer Darryl George Rosen on charges of rape and sexual assault last week has once again called this teaching into question.

Rosen, 26, has been charged with 17 felony and misdemeanor counts ranging from sexual assault to police misconduct, including the alleged rape of a 16-year-old girl in the back seat of his patrol car. He allegedly used his uniform to first gain access to his victims and later to guarantee their silence. When news of the case first broke last week, I couldn’t help but be struck by the similarities between it and the ongoing turmoil involving the Catholic Church and its pedophilic priests.

While the charges against Rosen remain to be proved in a court of law, such abuses of authority and the public trust by police officers are by no means unknown, and could possibly be just as widespread as the abuses perpetrated by pedophilic priests. An Internet search using the phrase “cop charged with rape” revealed dozens of similar cases of police misconduct across the United States. Moreover, the parallels between individual cases of police- and priest-perpetrated sexual abuse are unnerving.

First of all, the victims, many of whom are underage, are especially vulnerable, either because they have turned to the police for help or they have been accused of some sort of crime. Second, much like how the pedophilic priest uses his clerical collar to gain the trust of his victim, the sexually abusive cop uses his badge. Third, the predatory policeman or priest uses the power conferred upon him by society—a trust symbolized by the wearing of the uniform—to silence the cries of his victim. Last of all, because such illegal actions by individual cops and priests violate the public trust and damage the credibility of their respective institutions, both the Catholic Church and police departments are prone to covering up such incidents.

With the latter in mind, the Sacramento Police Department should be applauded for its aggressive approach in handling the Rosen case. After an initial report by one of Rosen’s alleged victims last summer was later substantiated when several other alleged victims stepped forward, the department moved quickly, suspending Rosen in December and filing charges against him last week.

Still, at the risk of tarring all policemen with the same brush, the question lingers: How much of this sort of abuse is going on? The Catholic Church has been protecting its pedophilic priests for decades, and only now is it being realized that the initial allegations were merely the tip of the iceberg. Could a similarly sized problem be lurking in police departments across the country, including our own?

I’m inclined to believe there is a problem, for one simple reason: the fetishistic nature Western culture attaches to the wearing of uniforms. While we may decry the Rev. Don Kimball’s feeble attempt to blame the victim quoted above, most of us have encountered people, men and women, who go ga-ga over men in uniform. The Internet is rife with Web sites featuring sadomasochists willingly being abused by burly men in police get-ups. The status and authority granted by society to policemen, symbolized by the uniform, is, for some, a powerful aphrodisiac.

Which is fine, as long as we are talking about consenting adults and policemen who aren’t on duty. I’m certain that, by and large, most policemen recognize this distinction. However, there are a few who do not and, intoxicated by the power of the uniform, they lose the ability to distinguish between societal rights and wrongs.

If pedophilic priests who have taken a vow of celibacy can’t be stopped from sexually abusing their young parishioners, who’s to stop the wayward cop who has taken no religious vows from doing the same thing to the public he’s supposed to be protecting and serving? Short of some heretofore undiscovered method of psychological profiling, there seems to be no easy answer to this question, save one.

We have to start teaching our children differently. Why do children trust these men in uniform? Because that’s what we teach them to do. For the child, the uniform becomes a sort of visual shorthand, an icon of hope in a sea of potentially dangerous adults. The child assumes that the man, be he in priest or police garb, is not a threat. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred, this assumption is correct. It’s that one time when things go wrong that’s troublesome, and the only solution I can see to the problem is to teach our children to trust no one, not even a man in a uniform.

SACRAMENTO — A Sacramento police officer who is accused of sexually assaulting six women while on duty is being sued by one of the women, a 16-year-old who claims she was raped while he was driving her to juvenile hall.The girl filed a claim Thursday against Officer Darryl Rosen, the city of Sacramento and the Sacramento Police Department. She is the third to file suit against Rosen and the city.Rosen, 27, has been on administrative leave since September, after an investigation by the department revealed accusations the officer had raped the girl and sexually assaulted five other women while on the graveyard shift. The charges stem from October 2000 until the five-year veteran went on leave.Rosen has been ordered to stand trial for the charges of rape, five counts of sexual battery, eight counts of assault under color of authority and three counts of false imprisonment. If convicted, he could face a life sentence. He has pleaded innocent to the charges.The girl is seeking compensation for medical expenses, emotional distress and other alleged damages.Rosen, who is out on bail, couldn't be reached for comment. City and police representatives also couldn't be reached.Rosen was investigated by the department after its internal affairs division was told by someone who knew the girl that she had been raped.The girl accuses Rosen of raping her while she was handcuffed in the back of his patrol car. She said he had picked her up on a warrant and was taking her to juvenile hall.In the claim, she said Rosen warned her against reporting the rape and made veiled threats against her family.

As his mother and sisters sobbed openly, former Sacramento Police Officer Darryl Rosen was convicted Tuesday of 11 counts of sexually assaulting women while on duty, but jurors deadlocked on the most serious charge - the rape of a 16-year-old.

Jurors told Judge Gail D. Ohanesian they were split 9-3 in favor of convicting Rosen of the rape and an accompanying count of assault by a peace officer. The rape allegedly took place in the back of his patrol car in a wooded area off Highway 160 and Northgate Boulevard three years ago.

Rosen was acquitted of four charges involving two of the case's six victims, one of whom was the woman who initially reported Rosen's misbehavior to officers.

The guilty verdicts carry a possible sentence of 10 years and four months in prison. Had he been convicted of the rape charge, Rosen would have faced a possible life term.

After the first several verdicts were read, Rosen leaned around the five sheriff's deputies who had flanked him in court and mouthed, "I love you," to his wife, Christel, who sat in the second row surrounded by her mother and his family.

Rosen's wife, parents, sisters and other family members and friends had been a constant presence in the courtroom throughout the trial, which began May 25 in Sacramento Superior Court. From the beginning, Rosen and his family appeared confident, jotting notes and shaking their heads in apparent disapproval of some testimony or evidence.

But as the verdicts on the 17 counts were read Tuesday, several family members sobbed and one of Rosen's sisters held their mother's tear-streaked face in her hands. Christel Rosen, a Sacramento police detective, cried quietly and occasionally shook her head.

Rosen was handcuffed and taken into custody immediately after the 3:40 p.m. hearing, despite pleas from his attorney, Christopher Miller, to allow the former officer to remain free until Ohanesian sentences him Aug. 10.

"Mr. Rosen has made every single appearance in this case since the case was filed. He has done absolutely nothing to suggest he is a risk of flight," Miller said. "Anything the family or family friends have done to delay this case should not be held against Mr. Rosen."

Ohanesian, who had reprimanded family members and Rosen himself during the trial, told Miller that she was not holding those incidents against his client.

"However, he now has been convicted of nine felony counts," she said. "I think remand is appropriate."

Rosen's family and his attorney slipped out of the courtroom through a back door and later declined to comment on the verdicts.

Jurors also were escorted out a back door under the guard of courthouse bailiffs after delivering their verdicts seven weeks to the day after the trial began.

They had spent nearly two weeks deliberating the charges, at times appearing weary or frustrated. Last week, the jurors told Ohanesian that seven of the charges had been resolved, clearly hoping to be finished with the case.

But the judge sent them back to debate the remaining 10 counts, telling them they had not deliberated "nearly long enough."

"It was hard," another juror said Tuesday, speaking on condition of anonymity. "We were all about to have nervous breakdowns."

The eight women and four men on the jury entered Ohanesian's courtroom at 3:05 p.m. Tuesday with verdicts on 15 of the 17 counts against Rosen, but were sent back to craft a question for the judge on the remaining two counts after the foreman said they needed clarification on "how to look at evidence."

The judge intended to give them the rest of the afternoon off and have them begin deliberating the final two counts today, but about 30 minutes later, she notified the attorneys that the final verdict was in.

At that point, a somber-looking Rosen embraced his wife and took his place next to his attorney at the table.

Despite several days of testimony devoted to the timing of Rosen's trip on the night the girl said she was raped, two of the jurors, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Tuesday that the question of timing was irrelevant to jurors.

"There was enough time either way," one of the jurors said.

Instead, they said, those who voted to acquit Rosen of the rape were troubled by the severity of the rape charge when compared to the lesser sexual assaults described by other victims in the case.

"Why would he go that far?" the juror questioned. "Some people believed he would have. And some people believed he wouldn't."

Prosecutor Michael Neves told Ohanesian that he would decide by the Aug. 10 hearing whether to seek retrial on the two counts related to the rape.

Jurors did agree on some elements of the 16-year-old's testimony. They convicted Rosen of four felony charges related to her - two counts of sexual battery for touching her, an assault by a peace officer and a count of intimidating a witness for telling the girl he would be waiting for her when she got out of juvenile hall.

They also found persuasive the testimony of an admitted prostitute who said Rosen forced her to touch the crotch of his uniform and then harassed her for telling other prostitutes on Del Paso Boulevard about him. One police officer testified that Rosen had heard "rumors" the girl was spreading and was looking for her.

But the jurors split on charges related to two friends who said Rosen grabbed their hands and forced each of them to touch him in separate incidents moments apart after an emergency call to their home in July 2001. Jurors acquitted Rosen of the charges involving one woman - an admitted prostitute with a lengthy criminal record - but convicted him of identical charges involving her friend.

Jurors also acquitted Rosen of sexually battering the woman who initiated the case against him. In December 2001, she told investigators he had responded to her home when she called 911 to report a burglary, then fondled her breasts and returned repeatedly under the pretense of trying to find her stolen television set.

She is one of three women in the criminal case who have filed civil suits against Rosen and the Sacramento Police Department.

Police Chief Albert Nájera said the guilty verdicts should be a reflection on the department's willingness to take care of its own rogue officers.

"When we started looking at this case, we weren't sure which way it was going to go," he said. "But if we have a bad apple in our organization, we have to do everything we can to get it out."

A Sacramento Superior Court judge Tuesday afternoon delayed sentencing for former Sacramento police officer Darryl Rosen, who was convicted of sexually assaulting four women while on duty. Rosen has fired his attorney and now claims he was incompetently defended because his lawyer did not allow him to take the stand during his trial. Rosen asked for a two-month delay in sentencing while his new attorney, Charles Bonneau, reviews all 21 days of testimony in the trial. "I think it's unfair to the people and the victims as far as getting closure on this case," said prosecutor Michael Neves. "[Bonneau] wants to get over 5,000 pages, sit down and read it all." Rosen's attorney said he thinks he can make things move quickly. "We will be making progress regardless of how quickly the transcripts come in," said Bonneau. "I think we already have about 400 pages, so we have a head start." In the meantime, Rosen will remain in solitary confinement in the Sacramento County Jail, where he has been since his conviction last July. There are fears that Rosen's former status as a police officer could make him vulnerable to attack. Rosen was convicted on 11 counts of sexually assaulting women while on duty. However, jurors deadlocked on the most serious charge, the rape of a 16-year-old girl. He could be sentenced to up to 10 years in prison. Rosen was fired by the Sacramento Police Department after an internal investigation.

Former Sacramento Police Officer Darryl Rosen, who faces sentencing today for sexually assaulting women while on duty, is asking a judge to grant him a new trial because his attorney made several significant errors, including not putting his wife on the witness stand.

In a declaration attached to the new-trial request, Christel Wimmer Rosen said she believes jurors would have been less likely to convict her husband of 11 counts of sexual assault and assault by a peace officer if they had known she often was working the same shift nearby as a police investigator.

"He often had no prior knowledge or warning of when I might show up," she wrote in documents submitted to Sacramento Superior Court Judge Gail D. Ohanesian. "The conduct described by the alleged victims in this case would be much less likely for a person whose wife might be right around the corner."

But prosecutor Michael Neves, in a rebuttal brief, says Christel Rosen's testimony would have made no difference.

"The claim that it is highly unlikely that a person would engage in this type of conduct if he could be caught by his wife is not necessarily true," he wrote. "It is common knowledge that some spouses engage in secretive inappropriate conduct, and it is not unheard of that they get caught 'in the act.' "

Instead, Neves says in his argument, there may have been a "legitimate reason" for the trial attorney, Christopher Miller, not to put Rosen's wife on the witness stand because her "attitude and demeanor during this trial" were not helpful for the defense.

Twice during the trial, Ohanesian criticized Christel Rosen's courtroom conduct. Once was for crying in the gallery in sight of jurors, an act the judge said was "deliberately intended to garner sympathy."

The other time was for allegedly whispering a threat to prosecution witness Kim Clark, who investigated the rape allegations, during a break in Clark's testimony.

Ohanesian will review the new-trial arguments before today's 9 a.m. hearing. If she decides Rosen's claims have no merit, she may decide to sentence him immediately.

In anticipation of that, the judge asked both sides to submit sentencing arguments to her in advance.

Rosen claims he also has other grounds for a new trial. In a 32-page request, he says Miller gave inadequate counsel because he didn't introduce evidence that police had talked to women who said Rosen didn't grope them or make lewd comments.

In the brief, which was written and filed by Rosen's new attorney, Charles M. Bonneau, Rosen also argues that Miller erred in not exploring the additional criminal histories of two of nine women who testified that he groped them or forced them to touch his crotch.

Each victim was asked about her criminal convictions during testimony.

Bonneau said Miller also should have explored an allegation, which never was the basis of a criminal charge, that one victim wrote bad checks. Jurors were aware that the woman was convicted of selling rock cocaine.

The other case involves the alleged 16-year-old rape victim, who was in jail awaiting trial on a burglary charge when she testified. Because the burglary case hadn't been resolved, the judge ordered she not be questioned about it. Miller did question the girl about two other arrests.

Neves said the additional charges wouldn't have changed the jury's opinions of the credibility of the victims.

"Defense counsel repeatedly reminded the jury about the fact the victims were sophisticated criminals and could not be trusted," he wrote in his 27-page argument against a new trial.

Miller did not return phone calls seeking comment. He represents Rosen in a federal lawsuit brought by one victim.

On Oct. 12, Miller appeared before U.S. District Judge William B. Shubb asking to be relieved from his obligation to represent Rosen, but the judge put off that decision until Monday, deferring until Ohanesian rules on the attorney competence issues.

In a legal twist, Rosen's new attorney is asking Shubb to keep Miller on the civil case. Bonneau downplayed the significance of Miller's role in his petition for a new trial, telling Shubb that it was a "minor" portion of his bid.

"They don't seem minor to me," Shubb said after reading a copy of the document, which claims Miller's ineffectiveness hurt Rosen in three ways.

Rosen's trial lasted from May 25 to July 13, ending after jurors told a judge they were deadlocked on the most serious of the charges against Rosen, the rape of the 16-year-old girl in the back of his patrol car. Had he been convicted of the rape, too, he would have faced a life prison term.

Instead, he faces a term of more than 10 years in prison because jurors were unable to decide whether Rosen was guilty of the rape and found him not guilty of several other charges.

Neves said those results show that Miller provided "a very competent defense" for Rosen.

"The trial results prove his effectiveness," Neves said in court documents. "Especially when you look at the strength of the case. Defendant assaulted numerous women in Sacramento and did it in a very similar and peculiar manner."

Rejecting Darryl Rosen's claim that he deserves a new trial because his attorney was ineffective, a Superior Court judge on Friday sentenced the former Sacramento police officer to more than nine years in prison for sexually assaulting women while on duty.

"You have tarnished the badge of the Sacramento Police Department," Judge Gail D. Ohanesian sternly told Rosen, as his wife stared blankly and his sister sobbed. "You preyed upon young women who you believed did not matter to society, who you thought no one would believe."

As two of the victims watched the proceedings amid a courtroom filled to capacity, Rosen sat impassively during the hourlong hearing. He wore orange jail coveralls and the yellow T-shirt of an inmate housed in an isolation cell.

In the jury box, wearing identical clothing, sat a girl who was 16 when Rosen sexually assaulted her in the back of his patrol car on June 29, 2001.

Now 19 and in jail awaiting trial on a burglary charge, the girl testified at Rosen's trial that the officer raped her as well as committed two other sexual batteries.

Rosen, 29, was convicted in July of 11 separate counts of sexual battery, false imprisonment and assault by a peace officer involving four women. Jurors found him innocent on four charges relating to two of his six alleged victims.

The jury deadlocked 9-3 for conviction on the rape charge, which could have meant a lifetime in prison for Rosen, but found him guilty of both sexual batteries and a charge of intimidating a witness.

On Friday, wiping tears from her cheeks, the woman told Ohanesian in a quiet voice that she has nightmares and doesn't trust men as a result of the attacks. She said she fears Rosen will come after her, as he threatened.

"I still believe when he is released, he still may search me out," she said, reading from a one-page typed statement. Rosen's victims have not been identified by The Bee because of its policy against naming victims of sexual assault.

A second victim, who was repeatedly fondled by Rosen during late-night drug searches of her mother's home, also described nightmares and said she is terrified of uniformed officers.

"I never wanted to testify at trial and have to relive the acts of the assault, questions about my character and be made to feel that I had somehow done something wrong or that it was my fault," said the woman, who began quaking the moment Rosen walked into the courtroom Friday.

"But I knew that I had to, because if I didn't tell what had happened to me, Officer Rosen would never have stopped," she said. "He would have continued to violate and humiliate other women under cover of his authority as a police officer."

During the trial, Ohanesian ordered a break in testimony because the woman appeared so distraught by Rosen's presence that she shook uncontrollably. Jurors found Rosen guilty of fondling her breasts and forcing her to touch his crotch.

The nine-year, eight-month prison sentence is the maximum allowable under sentencing guidelines. In ordering the term, Ohanesian rejected a probation officer's recommendation that Rosen serve eight years and four months.

"Your actions were a betrayal of public trust," she said before issuing the sentence.

Rosen's actions while on duty were in dramatic contrast to the loyal, honest young man his family and friends described.

"I find these accusations to be in complete contradiction to his upbringing and character," Rabbi Joseph Melamed wrote to Ohanesian in a plea for leniency in sentencing. The judge said she had received more than 40 letters on Rosen's behalf.

The son of a California Highway Patrol officer and a Los Angeles County sheriff's deputy, Rosen always had wanted to be a law enforcement officer.

So keen was his desire to be in uniform that he avoided drinking alcohol until his 21st birthday so he wouldn't hurt his chances of being hired, he told the Yolo County probation officer who prepared his sentencing report for Ohanesian.

Once he made it onto the street, he impressed fellow officers with his enthusiasm for the job. He was promoted to field training officer and briefly served as a police recruiter.

His family is close, he told the probation officer. Before he went to jail, he spoke to his parents several times a day on the telephone and he saw them at least twice a week.

Throughout the seven-week trial, Rosen was joined in the courtroom each day by at least a dozen friends and family members.

On Friday, Rosen had hoped to win a bid for a new trial.

His new attorney, Charles Bonneau, filed a petition listing seven points that he argued were grounds for new trial, including the alleged incompetence of Rosen's trial attorney, Christopher Miller.

Another issue centered on Bonneau's argument that two of the assaults couldn't really be considered assaults because the victims were forced to touch Rosen, rather than Rosen touching them.

Ohanesian dismissed both arguments and questioned wheth er Bonneau was willing to risk a rape conviction should the case be retried.

"This is not a close call. The motion is denied on all counts," she said, singling out the trial attorney for special praise. "Based on my professional opinion and my observations, I believe Mr. Miller provided a very professional, competent and effective defense."

Rosen has 30 days to file notice that he intends to appeal. Within the next few weeks, he will be sent to the California Department of Corrections, where authorities will evaluate which prison is best to house him.

SACRAMENTO - A former Sacramento police officer was sentenced to more than nine years in prison for sexual assaults he committed while on duty.

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Gail D. Ohanesian rejected Darryl Rosen's claim that he deserved a new trial because his attorney was ineffective before sentencing him Friday to the maximum sentence.

"You have tarnished the badge of the Sacramento Police Department," Ohanesian said. "You preyed upon young women who you believed did not matter to society, who you thought no one would believe."

Rosen, 29, was convicted in July of 11 separate counts of sexual battery, false imprisonment and assault by a peace officer involving four women. Jurors found him innocent on four charges relating to two of his six alleged victims.

The jury deadlocked 9-3 for conviction on a rape charge, which could have meant life in prison.

On Friday, one of his victims, a girl who was 16 when Rosen sexually assaulted her in the back of his patrol car in June 2001, said she still has nightmares and fears Rosen will come after her.

"I still believe when he is released, he still may search me out," said the young woman, who is now 19 years old and awaiting trial on a burglary charge.

A second victim, who was fondled by Rosen during late-night drug searches of her mother's home, also described nightmares and said she is terrified of uniformed officers.

Rosen's actions while on duty were in dramatic contrast to the loyal, honest young man his family and friends described. The judge said she had received more than 40 letters on Rosen's behalf.

His new attorney, Charles Bonneau, sought a new trial, alleging that Rosen's trial attorney, Christopher Miller, was incompetent.

The judge denied the bid for a new trial and praised Miller's handling of Rosen's defense as "very professional, competent and effective."

A former Sacramento police officer was sentenced to more than nine years in prison for sexual assaultshe committed while on duty.

Sacramento Superior Court JudgeGail D. Ohanesian rejected Darryl Rosen's claim that he deserved a new trialbecause his attorney was ineffective before sentencing him Friday to the maximumsentence.

"You have tarnished the badge of the Sacramento Police Department," Ohanesian said. "You preyed upon young women who you believed did not matter to society, who you thought no one would believe." Rosen, 29, was convicted in Julyof 11 separate counts of sexual battery, false imprisonment and assault by apeace officer involving four women.

Jurors found him innocent on four charges relating to two of his six alleged victims.

The jury deadlocked 9-3 for conviction on a rape charge, which could have meant life in prison.

On Friday, one of his victims, a girl who was 16 when Rosen sexually assaulted her in the back of his patrol car in June 2001, said she still has nightmares and fears Rosen will come after her.

"I still believe when he is released,he still may search me out," said the young woman, who is now 19 years old and

awaiting trial on a burglary charge.

A second victim, who was fondled by Rosen during late-night drug searches of her mother's home, also describednightmares and said she is terrified of uniformed officers.

Rosen's actions while on duty werein dramatic contrast to the loyal, honest young man his family and friends described.

The judge said she had received more than 40 letters on Rosen's behalf.

His new attorney, Charles Bonneau, sought a new trial, alleging that Rosen's trial attorney, Christopher Miller, was incompetent.

The judge denied the bid for a new trial and praised Miller's handling of Rosen's defense as "very professional, competent and effective."

Q: What happened to Darryl Rosen, the former police officer who was convicted of sexual assaults while on duty? Is he out of prison? - Jo, Sparks, Nev.

A: Rosen, now 35, is out of prison and living in the Sacramento area, records indicate.

On Oct. 22, 2004, a Sacramento Superior Court judge sentenced Rosen, a former Sacramento Police Department officer, to more than nine years in prison for sexually assaulting women while on duty, The Bee reported.

Rosen was convicted of 11 separate counts of sexual battery, false imprisonment and assault by a peace officer involving four women. Jurors found him not guilty on four charges relating to two of his six alleged victims.

The jury deadlocked 9-3 for conviction on the rape charge, which could have meant a lifetime in prison for Rosen, but found him guilty of both sexual batteries and a charge of intimidating a witness.

The city of Sacramento paid $390,000 to resolve federal civil rights lawsuits filed by three of the sexual assault victims.

Some of the information on The Awareness Center's web pages may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.

We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.

For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml . If you wish to use copyrighted material from this update for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Subscribe to The Awareness Center's Newsletter

Translate

Survivors ARE Heroes!

The Awareness Center believes ALL survivors of sex crimes should be given yellow ribbons to wear proudly.

Survivors of sexual violence (as adults and/or as a child) are just as deserving of a yellow ribbon as the men and women of our armed forces, who have been held captive as hostages or prisoners of war.

Survivors of sexual violence have been forced to learn how to survive, being held captive not by foreigners, but mostly by their own family members, teachers, camp counselors, coaches babysitters, rabbis, cantors or other trusted authority figures.

For these reasons ALL survivors of sexual violence should be seen as heroes!